This must be a problem limited to people who feel the need to accurately categorise themselves and everybody around them. As this is a hangout primarily inhabited by people who have abandoned one exclusive belief system, I think the semantics just fill the need to recreate the sense of order it applied to the world outside themselves. How about letting it go? I'm gonna go find Sparkplug and give her a hug. Come over for a beer with us.
There is no such thing as Agnosticism. Agnostics do not exist!
by nicolaou 92 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
-
-
BabaYaga
Okay, kids. My dear friend who is a Gnostic Bishop once said that "Every Gnostic was first an Agnostic." Her point was that we as individuals have to admit that we do NOT know in order to go searching for answers.
Gnostic hails from the Greek word Gnosis, which literally means "knowledge". Therefore, literally translated, Agnostic means "no knowledge" or, loosely translated, is the admission "I don't know".
So... Atheist means no god and Agnostic means no knowledge.
THERE'S YOUR DIFFERENCE/NON-DIFFERENCE. Semantics, if you want to argue about it, really.
Baba. -
Sparkplug
Okm First off, I am really glad someone thought I might need a hug. Because need one, need a dozen about now. Thanks!
And I just needed to pop back in and say I saw Ross's thread on his love for God and I appreciate that. Seeing he has never shown andy judgement towards me and my lack of faith. Nothing but wonderful and that in my book makes him a person worth knowing. For one can preach a label or a thought all day long....but to live by it? Well that is different.
Just had to say what a wonderful person LT is. Shines through in everything I have seen thus far.
-
Steam
Simple answer I think!
Just as atheist is a/ theist meaning "no theist" theist being god.
why shouldn't agnostic be a/ gnostic meaning "no gnostic" gnostic being knowledge?
agnostic asks questions because he doesn't have the knowledge he is asking questions about.
Works for me!
Steam Psalm 50:5
-
Hellrider
I read thru that article by Judith Hayes now. What a load of crap. Of course, by her definition of what atheism is (!!!!), I am of course an atheist. So is every other agnostic. But by redefining the term, one doesn`t get any further. By her new definition off the term, all agnostics are atheists (because we don`t believe in a defined God, like Yahweh, Allah or whatever), and all atheists are agnostics (because, like the "brilliant mind, Judith Hayes" says: "And that is, that the question is not, repeat not "Is there a God?" And the reason that question cannot be answered by anyone is that no one, not one single human being, has infinite knowledge of the universe")... So, all agnostics are "atheists", and all atheists are really "agnostics". It`s bullshit. Playing with words, that`s all that article is. I am surprised that noone else here sees it.
-
PrimateDave
I actually rather enjoyed reading those articles posted by startingover. They seemed to make sense to me. I can be agnostic in the sense that I am without absolute knowledge as to the existence of undetectable, non-human intelligences. I can be atheist because, with my current knowledge, I have found the evidence for god(s) lacking, and I therefore have "accepted the null hypothesis of the god theory: the hypothesis is not correct, ergo, there is no god." (Kid-A's words)
I find atheism very liberating. I no longer fear some unknowable entity who always has to be explained by other humans, at least in the sense of organized religions. For better of for worse, I am responsible for my own actions. There is no sin and no salvation. I live, learn, make mistakes, and hopefully improve my life to the best of my ability without relying on the superstitious belief in god(s) mediated by prophets, priests, or governing bodies.
Dave -
garybuss
There is no such thing as philosophy. Philosophers do not exist! -
Dansk
For better of for worse, I am responsible for my own actions.
Spot on!
Ian
-
nicolaou
I think I understand the point Garybuss was making in his last post; "Don't be an idiot Nic', just because you say Agnostics don't exist doesn't make it so." (Correct me if I'm wrong Gary.) But this is more than just semantics.
In ordinary usage I fully accept that theist = believer in God, agnostic = undecided about god and atheist = disbelieves god's existence.
As other posters have pointed out, words and their meanings evolve and drift over time and currently many dictionaries will define these words in the way commonly understood. Fine.
How about if a dictionary defined 'Christian' as "a member of any of certain Protestant churches, as the Disciples of Christ and the Plymouth Brethren." (see here) I know some on this board who call themselves Christian would reject that definition as they do not belong to an organisation or church but simply try to imitate Christ's example as they read it in scripture.
Well I reject the definition of 'atheist' as someone who definately believes that there is no god and, more to the point, so do almost all atheists!
Babayaga and Steam made similar comments which show how the original meaning of words becomes corrupted and that the new, less accurate, definition becomes the one that is accepted;
Babayaga - "Atheist means no god"Steam - "atheist is a/theist meaning "no theist" theist being god."
Sorry guys, theos means god, theist means 'believer in god'.
FOR CRYING OUT LOUD NIC' WHY DOES ANY OF THIS MATTER!!
I don't suppose it does but I feel the debate is worth having for one very good reason. It pulls us up and makes us think about who we are. I am not one for divisions. I don't want to pigeonhole people into categories or slap labels on them. The word 'agnostic' forces us to do that however. It creates an imaginary line that forces people to declare themselves.
Take the moon landings as an example. Many Americans believe that the moon landings were faked - let's call them moonists (I was tempted to say lunatics). Moonists are currently in the minority, though a sizeable one it must be said. If the issue of the moon landings ever moved from the trivial to the serious you might be forced to declare your view on the matter whereas at present you do not define yourself by this irrelevant (to you) issue. However, if pressed you would have to declare yourself to be a moonist or not. Would you actually use the word amoonist if you believed that the moon landings in all likelihood did happen just as the history books record? I doubt it.
So why should men & women who are not theists be forced to attach labels like atheist and agnostic to themselves? Why the gradation?
If you are not theist you are atheist - simple. Better yet, I am not theist, I am Nic'
-
Steam
Steam - "atheist is a/theist meaning "no theist" theist being god."
Sorry guys, theos means god, theist means 'believer in god'.
I stand corrected but wondering if that doesn't say the same thing.
"atheist is a/ theist meaning "no believer in god".
I'm trying! Steam Psalm 50:5